Navigate:

Retirements leave Dems pessimistic about House

Of nine House members who are retiring and not seeking another office, all are Democrats. | AP Photos
Close

“Today, you have heard a lot [of] bluster from Republicans about Democratic retirements — don’t believe it,” the DCCC wrote in the memo. “After the House changes control, there are always retirements in the party that was formerly in the majority.”

The DCCC also argued that the retirees are vacating seats that the party is well positioned to hold.

Text Size

-

+

reset

“Retirements are a problem only if a party cannot hold the seat,” said the memo. “The nine Democrats who have retired this cycle represent seats with strong Democratic DNA and have, or will have, strong Democratic candidates.”

For some Democrats, calling it quits is more than just a judgment that winning back the majority isn’t worth the wait. This year, several outgoing lawmakers have pointed to the once-in-a-decade redistricting process and the political hardships it presents as a key culprit in their decision making.

“You have to represent people [who] you’ve never represented before,” Cardoza told POLITICO. “To represent nearly half of new voters … well that’s not my idea of a good time.”

Frank, speaking to reporters at Newton City Hall in Massachusetts on Monday, cited similar concerns. Under the state’s recently passed redistricting plan, Frank’s southeastern Massachusetts-area seat will become less Democratic-friendly and will take in a swath of mostly blue-collar areas that he has not previously had to campaign in — meaning that the 71-year-old former gavel-holder would have to run another tough campaign.

“The district is very substantially changed,” Frank said. “I don’t want to be torn by my obligation to 325,000 new people and the constituents I already have an obligation to.”

For Frank, his decision to step down has an added political dimension. He faced an unexpectedly hard-fought 2010 campaign against a tea-party-aligned opponent who held him to 54 percent — his lowest vote percentage since his 1980 election to the House.

“It would have been a tough campaign,” he said. “I would have a hard time justifying to myself to do it.”

Other Democrats who have decided to forgo another term have expressed a lingering sense of isolation from party leaders who have sought to advance an ambitious and frequently politically driven agenda.

Of the nine Democrats who are retiring and not seeking another office in 2012, four conservative-minded party lawmakers voted for someone other than House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to serve as the Democratic leader following the 2010 midterms.

Perhaps no one has expressed disenchantment with the White House more forcefully than Cardoza. Upon his retirement last month, Carodoza, who represents a California district that has been hammered by the housing crisis, issued a scathing statement, saying he was “dismayed by the administration’s failure to understand and effectively address the current housing foreclosure crisis.”

Retirement leaves Dems pessimistic about House ........... yeah, voters are so happy with the 'do-nothing GOP'....... since Boehner took over the approval rating of Congress has really sky-rocketed...... yeah.

Retirement leaves Dems pessimistic about House ........... yeah, voters are so happy with the 'do-nothing GOP'....... since Boehner took over the approval rating of Congress has really sky-rocketed...... yeah.

Hey Scooter.

The GOP was elected to stop the lunacy of the left.

And just for the record; those approval ratings also apply to the Senate, which is part of the Congress.

I'm sure the country is enthralled that Reid is blocking all the legislation of a Republican House elected in a landslide.

Be grateful ignorance isn't painful. The medication to deal with it would take you broke

The entire Democratic Party has been hijacked by leftist radicals and failed ideology. They are morally and ethically bankrupt. They can no longer hide this from the American people. So this is the result. Barney Frank is among the worst of the offenders.

Well, Toke-a lot, most were elected to stop Obama from forcing America into Euro-socialism. Most, if not all incumbents will be reelected. They almost always are. And, your much ballyhooed low approval of congress doesn't matter- only voters in each congress critter's home district have the final say. Rs take the Senate, keep the house, and have a 50 - 50 chance at the presidency. It's the economy now, and in 11 months

Most, if not all incumbents will be reelected. They almost always are.

Seems to me a lot of incumbents were not reelected in 2010.

Bullshark: Nov. 28, 2011 - 9:55 PM EST

Rs take the Senate, keep the house, and have a 50 - 50 chance at the presidency. It's the economy now, and in 11 months

The majority of Americans blame Republicans for the economy.

In 2010 voters voted for jobs as promised by Republicans but what they got was zealots who want to (1) push extreme social agendas, (2) dismantle social programs the preserve the safety net for ordinary Americans, and (3) drag the economy back into the economic ditch of George W. Bush.

Politico can talk all they will, but last election, Barney Frank actually had to get off his high horse and actively campaign. Typically used to running practically unopposed, Frank had to work for the first time in three decades to keep the 4th MA District. There was some question as to whether he would retain his seat even then...without this buggaboo blame of redistricting.

Scott Bielat polled 43% and Frank took 54%, in the final 2010 counts. So 47% thus voted against Frank.

In the two years since, Frank's done nothing to merit keeping his seat. In fact, he's damaged his standing even further, becoming more and more out of touch and radical. And radical Left does not work today...the electorate has figured that much out. I suggest that Frank lost the plurality. Frank figured out that he's unwanted and washed up as well...a difficult conclusion to come to for someone so arrogant.

Doubtless many in MA's 4th District question whether they should have given Frank the heave ho in 2010. This time, apparently they planned to do just that. So, Frank split, in order to get another Democrat the chance, which was the only chance the Democrats had on keeping "their" seat. Otherwise, 4th MA would have gone Republican. Again, Scott Bielat proved that it was possible in 2010, providing hope even against the entrenched Leftist power broker demagogue Frank.

In 2012, Frank would have had to fight even harder to keep his seat, with the people watching, and he certainly could NOT stand upon his record since 2010. So the loser took his marbles home.